Questions about Jesus and JW’s

[MissKate13]

1. Jehovah’s Witnesses say Jesus was “a god.” This is how the NWT reads (John 1:1).

Do JW’s believe Jesus was a true or false god?

2. JW’s say Jesus is a created being.

When was Jesus (capital or lower case g) created?

I look forward to your responses to one or both questions.

MissKate13

[2timothy316]

Do JW’s believe Jesus was a true or false god?

A true god.

RELATED POSTS

How many Only True Gods exist?
viewtopic.php?p=1090732#p1090732

How many only true Christs have there been ? (tigger)
viewtopic.php?p=866476#p866476

FURTHER RESEARCH [Only True God] http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... e-god.html

I’m happy to know you believe Jesus is/was a true god. And for the record, whether a lower case or capital G is before the word god makes no difference to me. Capital letters were not used in the original language of the Greek extant manuscripts.

Since you believe Jesus is a true god, does this mean you believe there are two gods?

There is only one True Almighty God. While Jesus is a mighty spirit being, a god even, he is second to Jehovah the Almighty. Jesus is not the True Almighty God or even equal to his Father. Jesus is never referenced to as the True God or a True God.

Satan is a god and his demons are gods in that they are mighty and powerful. People even worship them. People even worship angels as gods and Jesus as god but this is wrong according to Deuteronomy 6:10, Matthew 4:10 and Revelation 22:9. None of these can hold a candle to who Jehovah is according to Psalms 83:18.

Is Jesus a true or false god?

Just a god as John 1:1 states.

[Eloi]

(...)
You see, Greek has a word for other and Paul clearly knew it because he used it a lot. He didn't use it in Colossians 1:16, though. He might have meant it, sure. It's possible. There's no reason for NWT translators to insert it, though, for any reasons other than conforming the text to their own theology with which the text conflicts, both in Greek and in English generated within reasonable translation guidelines.

Not because I question the possible knowledge you claim to have about Paul's biblical language or the presumed note you think Paul must have had include in this passage (actually the note is in another text), but... in the Bible (including Paul's letters) the Greek words πασ/παντα do not have as strict a meaning as some think (I think I talked about this in another post). Think, for example, how other biblical versions translate that Greek word in these texts: Luke 13:2; 21:29; Phil. 2:21. Also, tell me if the sense of that Greek word is absolute in 1 Cor. 6:18 or 15:24.

In fact, in Rom. 5:12 it is said that through Adam death spread to all men and obviously Adam, who was also a man, did not receive death by extension, so that "everyone/all" does not include him even though he is a man. Isn't that the same in the case of Jesus in Col. 1:16?

Sometimes Biblical writers assume that certain things will be understood without needing to be clarified, because they are self-evident; For example, read 1 Cor. 15:27, which contains an extraordinary clarification regarding the word "all".

If first-century Christians knew that Jesus had an origin, obviously that fact need not be explained away as an exception. The Bible itself says so explicitly in Rev. 3:14 and Col. 1:15,18, but Jesus himself also publicly confessed it in John 6:57.

For these reasons it is EVIDENT that the Greek word means "all other" in Col. 1:16.

[MissKate13]

Do JW’s believe Jesus was a true or false god?

A true god.

RELATED POSTS

How many Only True Gods exist?
viewtopic.php?p=1090732#p1090732

How many only true Christs have there been ? (tigger)
viewtopic.php?p=866476#p866476

FURTHER RESEARCH [Only True God] http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... e-god.html

I’m happy to know you believe Jesus is/was a true god. And for the record, whether a lower case or capital G is before the word god makes no difference to me. Capital letters were not used in the original language of the Greek extant manuscripts.

Since you believe Jesus is a true god, does this mean you believe there are two gods?

There is only one True Almighty God. While Jesus is a mighty spirit being, a god even, he is second to Jehovah the Almighty. Jesus is not the True Almighty God or even equal to his Father. Jesus is never referenced to as the True God or a True God.

Satan is a god and his demons are gods in that they are mighty and powerful. People even worship them. People even worship angels as gods and Jesus as god but this is wrong according to Deuteronomy 6:10, Matthew 4:10 and Revelation 22:9. None of these can hold a candle to who Jehovah is according to Psalms 83:18.

Is Jesus a true or false god?

Just a god as John 1:1 states.

Since you’ve claimed that Jehovah is the ONLY true God, then that by default makes all other gods false. You simply won’t admit it, and I understand why. I certainly would never publicly want to write such a thing.

So let’s shift gears. Why do you believe Jesus was created. Can you provide some Scripture for me to examine?

[Eloi]

(...) Since you’ve claimed that Jehovah is the ONLY true God, then that by default makes all other gods false. (...)

Since you do not realize that is JESUS and not JWs who says Jehovah, his Father, is "the only true God" (John 17:3) you will be confused until you accept Jesus' teachings.

[JehovahsWitness]

If Paul had intended to use the word “other,” he would have since he uses it at least 38 times by my count. He was very familiar with the word.

This is a very weak argument. You have conceded that adding words is not endemically problematic stating ...

I agree. The word “thing” is not in the original language, The KI has it in brackets, and they use it in their English translation as all translations do to make the verse more understandable.

Obviously the above holds true whether or not Paul was familiar with or used a word elsewhere. After all do you have any idea how many times Paul used the word "things"? You are not going to argue that If Paul had intended to use the word “things,” he would have since he uses it at least HUNDREDS of times by my count. He was very familiar with the word.



Yet the word "things" is not in Col1:16 and your translators add it. If your argument is that no English word which Paul was familiar with and used elsewhere, should be added, then your own translators are guilty of violating your own ad hoc rule.

The truth of the matter is unless your can present evidence that "other" changes the intended meaning of the verse, the fact that Paul could have and didnt include a word that existed is neither here nor there.

I have answered your question to the best of my ability.

Yes I know you have, and I aplaud a yone that does their best but that does not stop your answers from being logically, gramatically and contextually weak. You are in a forum with some serious students here, emotions and enthusiasm is no substitute for rigor and good research.

Thus far your "evidence" has been as follows

- some inexplicably bizzare (and untenible) nonsense about brackets
- the claim that since the NWT stands alone in this instance, the majority must be right
- and above, if Paul demonstratively knew of a word and didnt use it, it should not be added.

I know you have done your best, but your best isn't convincing to put it mildly. Sorry,


JW


https://fosterheologicalreflections.blo ... olute.html

[JehovahsWitness]

I have answered your question to the best of my ability. Now please reciprocate by answering mine.

Can you provide any other Scripture that says Jesus was created? Yes? No?

When was Jesus created?

I have already answered this WITH scriptural references See post #5

[Purple Knight]

My contribution to this is that there is just not parity between certain languages, and word-for-word translation will not preserve meaning. I watch a lot of Japanese anime and I read a lot of German philosophy, and I have gotten the idea that these are two languages that do not have great parity with English, despite German being fundamental in the formation of English and a lot of the words themselves being the same or very similar.

It's worse with anime. Japanese must have very, very low parity with English. Sometimes when it is not dubbed, and the subtitles try to translate word for word, they will leave you scratching your head, even when cultural references are completely out of play.

[MissKate13]

If Paul had intended to use the word “other,” he would have since he uses it at least 38 times by my count. He was very familiar with the word.

This is a very weak argument. You have conceded that adding words is not endemically problematic stating ...

I agree. The word “thing” is not in the original language, The KI has it in brackets, and they use it in their English translation as all translations do to make the verse more understandable.

Obviously the above holds true whether or not Paul was familiar with or used a word elsewhere. After all do you have any idea how many times Paul used the word "things"? You are not going to argue that If Paul had intended to use the word “things,” he would have since he uses it at least HUNDREDS of times by my count. He was very familiar with the word.



Yet the word "things" is not in Col1:16 and your translators add it. If your argument is that no English word which Paul was familiar with and used elsewhere, should be added, then your own translators are guilty of violating your own ad hoc rule.

The truth of the matter is unless your can present evidence that "other" changes the intended meaning of the verse, the fact that Paul could have and didnt include a word that existed is neither here nor there.

I have answered your question to the best of my ability.

Yes I know you have, and I aplaud a yone that does their best but that does not stop your answers from being logically, gramatically and contextually weak. You are in a forum with some serious students here, emotions and enthusiasm is no substitute for rigor and good research.

Thus far your "evidence" has been as follows

- some inexplicably bizzare (and untenible) nonsense about brackets
- the claim that since the NWT stands alone in this instance, the majority must be right
- and above, if Paul demonstratively knew of a word and didnt use it, it should not be added.

I know you have done your best, but your best isn't convincing to put it mildly. Sorry,


JW


https://fosterheologicalreflections.blo ... olute.html

I used your own Watchtower Library as evidence. The reason is stated there.

Hey JW, whether I’ve convinced you or not makes no difference. I posted my view of the Colossians passage to the best of my ability.

No matter how much you disagree, the word “other” is not in the original language. That should be enough for anyone to it.

You never did answer my questions. I would appreciate it if you did. Maybe you are aware of other verses that say Jesus was created. I’d like to see them. I’d also like to know when you believe He was created.

Have a blessed night, JW. I have one more post to write, then that’s it until sometime tomorrow.

Be blessed!
Kate

[JehovahsWitness]

My contribution to this is that there is just not parity between certain languages, and word-for-word translation will not preserve meaning. I watch a lot of Japanese anime and I read a lot of German philosophy, and I have gotten the idea that these are two languages that do not have great parity with English, despite German being fundamental in the formation of English and a lot of the words themselves being the same or very similar.

It's worse with anime. Japanese must have very, very low parity with English. Sometimes when it is not dubbed, and the subtitles try to translate word for word, they will leave you scratching your head, even when cultural references are completely out of play.

I saw a report about French and English that explained they use different parts of the brain linguistically ... being bilingual myself, its more than about words, there is indeed a thought process that is different, we .."approach" ideas from a different direction. Its very hard to explain ...

[JehovahsWitness]

I used your own Watchtower Library as evidence. The reason is stated there.

My dear Kate, I did not ask you for evidence of what WE believe, I asked you for evidence about what YOU (MissKate) what YOU claimed. Here is the claim in case you have forgotten what you said ...

...the word “other” has been added to the Colossians passage four times, and it changes the meaning of what the author intended.

No matter how much you disagree, the word “other” is not in the original language. That should be enough for anyone to it.

If its not enough for you, I don't see why it should be enough for "everyone". Did you not say the following ...

I agree. The word “thing” is not in the original language, The KI has it in brackets, and they use it in their English translation as all translations do to make the verse more understandable.

So your point is that just because a word is not in the original text, that's not to say the word should not be added. In other words, you here are arguing that a word not being in the original text is NOT argument ENOUGH that it should not be added.



JW